Lone was presented the Celebration of Leadership Award during a May 16 banquet in Madison where he was recognized along with six students for “creating real change for lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgendered (LGBT) and ally students across Wisconsin.”

According to the GSAFE Web site, Lone created East’s GSA in 2003 and has worked to ensure a safe place for LGBTQ students and their allies ever since. As club advisor, he has created an environment to support LGBTQ students and discuss the harassment that many of them deal with at school, according to the Web site.

Lone helped organize teams to participate in AIDS Walk and, for the past six years, spear-headed efforts to observe a Day of Silence, the Web site said.

Scott Lone has been the target of conservative opposition and public scrutiny as an out history teacher at West Bend East High School, the fourth largest high school in Wisconsin. He created his school’s GSA in 2003 and has worked to ensure a safe place for LGBTQ students and their allies ever since. As club advisor he has created an environment to support LGBTQ students and discuss the harassment that many of them deal with at school. He helped organize teams to participate in AIDS Walk and for the past six years spear-headed efforts to observe Day of Silence. Scott also co-facilitated a support group for LGBT students. He regularly incorporates LGBT history into his U.S. History and Government/Law curriculum. He is consistent and fair when addressing all harassment issues amongst students and staff. In the summer and fall of 2008 Scott faced intense public persecution in the form of accusations, innuendos, letters to the school board, school administration, and the State Attorney General because of his strong stance against one groups’ efforts to repeal the school’s non-discrimination policy. Despite these attacks, Scott has continued to be a resource and strong support to LGBT students at his school. (Scott teaches at West Bend East High School)_________________________________________________

Interesting. Lone's name was never brought up (to the best of my knowledge) at any school board meetings. An objection was made via email to the creation of a GLBTQ support group funded with taxpayer dollars, which was subsequently disbanded. No other references, other than this one, were directed towards Lone. Who is fooling who? And might I add, if one tries to do an ORR for materials to confirm any of this using Lone's name, you will be denied by the city attorney (as we were). Harassment, you know. Our point exactly.

76 comments:

Actually, Mike, not true. The resume, as you should recall, was the only allowable ORR. We were not privvy to emails whatsoever. Only a resume. One piece of paper. One. Perhaps you should go back and check your records. It's been a while.

Yeah, better nip this one in the bud while you can. If you don't, the next thing you know they'll be saying crazy, unAmerican things like suggesting that someone other than a white, middle class, heterosexual, fundamentalist Christian might be a taxpayer too, or have contributed to US history, or even (shudder) be a full citizen with a say at the ballot box.

Lone's name may not have come up at school board meetings, but that did not stop you from making an ORR for his personal info. You were given his resume and denied all of the documents that are protected by employment law. That is how it should be.

You were on a bit of a witch hunt when it came to Scott Lone and were stymied by the fact that he is an ordained minister and his partner is a former catholic priest. That ended your shot at trying to make him out to be a sinner.

The fact is folks, most of Ginny's ORR's are really just snipe hunts in hopes of finding something that she can try to make into something it is not through innuendo and half truths.

It is a sad testament to the community and a waste of taxpayer dollars.

I have to wonder if a very one sided view would be taught by, let's say, someone who is openly homosexual as he/she "regularly incorporates LGBT history into US History and Government and Law".

In case anyone is interested,I copied and pasted text from an article found at: http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=101

Our Founding Fathers were deeply concerned about morality in the military and society as a whole. They knew that once our morals slipped, our culture would follow. Let's take a good hard look at our culture. Were they right?

From George Washington's Farewell Address:

"Of all the dispositions and habits which leads to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity [happiness]. Let it simply be asked, "Where is the security for property, for reputation for life, if the sense of religious obligations desert . . . ?" And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. 'Tis substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it [free government] can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric? "20

While the issue of homosexuals in the military has only recently become a point of great public controversy, it is not a new issue; it derives its roots from the time of the military's inception. George Washington, the nation's first Commander-in-Chief, held a strong opinion on this subject and gave a clear statement of his views on it in his general orders for March 14, 1778:

"At a General Court Martial whereof Colo. Tupper was President (10th March 1778), Lieutt. Enslin of Colo. Malcom's Regiment [was] tried for attempting to commit sodomy, with John Monhort a soldier; Secondly, For Perjury in swearing to false accounts, [he was] found guilty of the charges exhibited against him, being breaches of 5th. Article 18th. Section of the Articles of War and [we] do sentence him to be dismiss'd [from] the service with infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with abhorrence and detestation of such infamous crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of camp tomorrow morning by all the drummers and fifers in the Army never to return; The drummers and fifers [are] to attend on the Grand Parade at Guard mounting for that Purpose." 1

General Washington held a clear understanding of the rules for order and discipline, and as the original Commander-in-Chief, he was the first not only to forbid, but even to punish, homosexuals in the military.

An edict issued by the Continental Congress communicates the moral tone which lay at the base of Washington's actions:

"The Commanders of . . . the thirteen United Colonies are strictly required to show in themselves a good example of honor and virtue to their officers and men and to be very vigilant in inspecting the behavior of all such as are under them, and to discountenance and suppress all dissolute, immoral, and disorderly practices, and also such as are contrary to the rules of discipline and obedience, and to correct those who are guilty of the same." 2

End of copy and paste material.

We owe a great deal to these men. Can we do better by ignoring their warnings and examples?Is this being taught in ANY US History and or Government and Law high school course in America? If not, why not?

Mike,So glad you stepped down. Really. You obviously cannot, will not, do not understand the harassment policy. In fact, I could reprint your actual statement about that, but I'd rather stick to the issues you just brought up.

First, concerning Lone's name coming up at school board meetings. So you admit I am right about that. Good.

Next, concerning the ORR. I find this particularly remarkable. Now that we can read the entire article from GSAFE, we can see that Lone had MUCH to do with the harassment policy. However, if a taxpayer would want to know this, they would not be able to obtain that information because this gentleman openly states he is gay. So my question is this....a person states they are gay, and they can be excused from handing over ORRs? That is deplorable.

Ordained minister? Yes, I learned that from his resume. Do I care? No, Mike, that would be what you would call an "innuendo" on your part. His partner is an ex-Catholic priest? I really had no idea. REALLY!

Mike, just admit it. You are angry because you didn't understand the policy, you admitted openly you were not going to try to even understand it, left it in the hands of your incompetent superintendent, then got angry because you got called on it while acting as a member of the school board. Get over it.

Who exactly do you think I am? Step down? Don't understand the policy? When did I ever do either of those two things?

Clearly, you have me mistaken for someone else.

Scott Lone had nothing todo with the formation and writing of the policy. I know this because I asked several people who would know including Scott himself.

The fact that he is gay has nothing to do with you getting an ORR filled. It has to do with privacy right afforded to all people in this country. You were allowed to see what the law allows you to see. The rest was personal info that is and never will be any of your business.

You continue to amaze me with your general lack of knowledge in the areas you comment on in this blog.

I agree with Marjorie. Ginny, why are you obsessed with gay people? Why do you think that gays shouldn't be allowed to teach? You took on a campaign to get this man fired, to besmirch his name for the sole reason that he is gay. The extent of your hatred is truly mind blowing.

Ginny, Can I just ask why this particular post was so important to put up? I undestand you do not agree with this teachers lifestyle but to our him like this? Most people would not have done the research to locate this guys name or photo even. I guess I am not understanding the purpose behind that. You could have made your point without the name and photo. Who are the kids in the photo ou linked to? Are they kids at the school who happen to be gay? Are they minors? Gosh Ginny, I really hope that these kids do not get harrassed or get a beat down for their photo being linked on the highly read blog. If it is about protecting the children then why put these in harms way? Just asking

You should know that David Barton, the person behind the "Wallbuilders" website you quoted from, is known to have made up quotations and failed to confirm the accuracy of others. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallbuilders#Unconfirmed_quotations

All I know is, the idea of starting a GSA in my high school would have been inconceivable, so kudos to Scott Lone and the students who are part of the club.

However, I still don't quite understand Ginny's obsession with "tax payer dollars." Does this high school have a black student or minority student group? By your logic, why should those occur on "tax payer's time?" Should only academic clubs be allowed to exist at high schools?

And re: "HUH?", yes, Ginny, LGBT history is a part of history, just as women's history and minority history are part of history.

This is what I was afraid of.Now we have a gay teacher instructing students in history and included gay issues. What is next? How can anyone find this acceptable? Is there a group that meets for Christian kids? This is all rather disturbing to me. I pay enough in taxes to have them go to teaching debachery and self indulgence through homosexuality. This teacher should not be allowed to have such a group on school grounds. It is totally reprehensable to teach young people it is OK to be gay. Does the school have a group for those that have made the right choice and changed their ways from homosexualality? For those kids that ave been healed of this sin?

Protect - Ok I am going to try and be polite here. My dander is up a bit about this.

First do you really think this teacher is going around recruiting students to join the GSA? Seriously think about it. That alone would be considered harrassment of the studets. So I highly doubt that to be the case.

Second of all, where is he proof that tax dollars are being spent on this and that he is not doing it on his own time? According to the research I have done there are no care groups that meet under the umbrella of the school. So if this gentleman has a group he would have to be doing it on his own time.

Third teaching homosexuality as a history lesson? OK this one was the most humerous. I cannot imagine if this was actually the case that some students would not have said something to someone if they had a problem with it and he would have been corrected. As we know some students agree with Ginny and the homosexuality issue. Surely they would have said something. Why are we not asking the students what they think about this teacher and what he teaches? Because that would be far too easy. I believe that students have good heads on their shoulders and are capable of forming their own thoughts on issues like this. Why not trust them?

Let me state this once again. While I personally do not agree with homosexuality, I REFUSE to pass judgement on others. Remember Protect the Bible does say Judge not lest you be judged. Therefore, unless you are absolutely sure that you have no sin what so ever in your life I would be careful. Judgement may come your way. That is not a threat really it's not just pointing out God's word is all.

Any club for any organization and its focus can be held after school in a public school including counseling for homosexuals, Bible based (and other) religions, the obese, teen-mothers, abused children, children of alcoholic, divorced or deceased parents and others. Mr. Lone's group meets outside of normal school hours (like other groups) without financial or other supports (like "atta boy's"). In fact, no mention of Mr. Lone's award was made by any administrators or school board members.

West Bend is not San Francisco. Science is overshadowed by Bible quotes, hatred, fear, and ignorance (even though the creator created hermaphrodites). If allowed, I would not put it past some WB citizens to treat gays like Matthew Shepard.

Ginny and others have pursued Mr. Lone for years for his counseling support for those who are not heterosexual as well as their friends/associates to no avail. If something was amiss, would Mr. Lone have not been reprimanded or disciplined?

This post reinforces Ginny's position towards the homosexual community.

Note: Ginny and others contested the West Bend School district harassment policy for its complying with state and federal guidelines regarding the harassment of people for sexual preference. I believe her own workplace follows this policy. Does Ginny contest her workplace policy? Would she assist a client to the best of her ability if she knew he or she was gay? If she is willing to "out" Mr. Lone, who else is she willing to out? Would she ignore client privacy?

Note: Sexual preference harassment laws do not just refer to gay or not gay. They also address the harassment of any person regarding who s/he may be interested in. Under those laws, I would not be able to harass someone for being interested in an obese person, a teen-mother, a disabled person, a person of the Muslim faith or an Asian.

Free speech has been curtailed a number of times, but "hate" speech unfortunately must be allowed.

Mike: "Scott Lone had nothing todo with the formation and writing of the policy. I know this because I asked several people who would know including Scott himself."

Perhaps you personally know people who would give you this info. I do not. Therefore, I did what any taxpayer has a right to do. I did an ORR. You are incorrect as to the denial of my ORR for Lone's emails. My response from the city attorney clearly states that being the reason for my denial.

Pep: "Ginny and others contested the West Bend School district harassment policy for its complying with state and federal guidelines regarding the harassment of people for sexual preference."

Incorrect. I contested it for giving special rights to children according to who they have sex with. It is not a mandatory law. It is not required to write the policy that way. I have factual information from the DPI that states such. Again, be careful what you say. You are attempting to mislead with disingenuous information.

MLIS: Your commentary had been appropriate for good debate on this blog. However, you stooped to the namecalling and now you kind of just look like the rest of those who have nothing else to say any more.

Wow. Marjorie posted something about how the Bible is unequivocal in its condemnation of gluttony, and wondered if it would be appropriate to attack obese people, since they are transgressing Biblical teaching, with the same vehemence that Ginny attacks homosexuality (especially considering that obesity is a much more common problem than homosexuality).

And Ginny removes the post as offensive.

So, according to Ginny, citing Bible verses and calling on people to follow them is offensive, if it constitutes a personal attack on another.

Some commenters have questioned why this was posted by Ginny now (award was given in May?) & why she was motivated to research this (going to the GSAFE site). Note that there was an article about this in the West Bend Daily News on Saturday, August 15th;

Judy Steffes covered it in her "Around the Bend" column:

"Teacher of the year West Bend East High School teacher Scott Lone has been selected the 2009 Educator of the Year by the Gay Straight Alliance for Safe Schools (GSAFE). Lone was presented the Celebration of Leadership Award during a May 16 banquet in Madison where he was recognized along with six students for “creating real change for lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgendered (LGBT) and ally students across Wisconsin.” According to the GSAFE Web site, Lone created East’s GSA in 2003 and has worked to ensure a safe place for LGBTQ students and their allies ever since. As club advisor, he has created an environment to support LGBTQ students and discuss the harassment that many of them deal with at school, according to the Web site. Lone helped organize teams to participate in AIDS Walk and, for the past six years, spear-headed efforts to observe a Day of Silence, the Web site said."

Yes, I made an allusion that Protect the Yout is a bigot. That is because statements like "It is totally reprehensable [sic] to teach young people it is OK to be gay" and "Homosexuality has no place in the public schools!" are bigoted positions.

I'm sorry if you are uncomfortable with people criticizing others' opinions and calling them out as bigoted, but there's no other way to describe such positions. If you see that as a "personal attack", so be it.

And I agree with others that your removal of a comment drawing a parallel analogy to another "sin" from the Bible was very poor form. Again, your attempts to silence people on your blog is very troublesome, and detracts from any credibility you are attempting to amass.

A friend of mine used my login accidentally to make that post, so it wasn't the Loki that usually uses this login.

Nevertheless, the point was simply that citing viewpoints of the "Founding Fathers," as gardening girl did, can be a spurious technique given that they existed during a time that held different beliefs about a great number of things. Times and opinions change, and slavishly dedicating oneself to the emulation of people from the past can lead to anachronistic beliefs.

Regarding the comment about David Barton and Wallbuilders:1. When liberals want to discredit someone they resort to lying about them. Please refrain from spreading false rumors about David Barton. He is the most amazing historian of our day.2. I published quotes from our Founding Fathers. QUOTES!! Check them out.3. Take their words to heart. They were great men used mightily in the forming of this great nation you and I are priveledged to live in.

SLAVERY and the Founding Fathers? MOST wanted it abolished and there was much debate over the topic. They knew it was immoral to enslave another human being. It reminds me of the abortion issue so heavily debated today. Many politicians today know it is an evil practice and want it too abolished. May God help us.

By the way, how many of you know that it was CHRISTIANS who ended the slave trade and worked hardest to end slavery in the USA. The culture did not follow and a horrible war ensued. Yes, may God help us!

West Bend Citizen Advocate said-Eema: I expected you to show up and make some untowards comment. Interesting how posting this information made you come to the "rescue" of something that has nothing to do with what you state.

"Come to the "rescue" of something that has nothing to do with what you state"?

I'm not 100% sure what you mean by this since grammatically and logically it makes no sense. If you mean that I shouldn't speak up when someone attacks an individual for being gay, then you're wrong. I believe that everyone should be treated equally, gay straight and anything in between. You assume to know what I know or don't know about the situation, but that in itself is irrelevant. If I were alive during the Civil Rights movement I would have marched and protested. Would you think that strange since I am not black?

Local MLIS--the funniest thing to me is that Ginny, by removing my comment, is essentially saying that her OWN behavior is offensive.

I wasn't impolite. I did not call Ginny any names. I simply cited some Bible verses and asked if it was appropriate for Christians, considering that gluttony is a sin, to work to stigmatize obese people. Doing so would be to act just as Ginny has toward gay people.

But apparently, those are Bible verses Ginny finds 'offensive'.

Or maybe, it's just too good a point. Maybe Ginny has too much fun at pointing fingers at other sinners, and REALLY doesn't like it when someone points out that she is not perfect.

People like Ginny spend all their energy howling about the specks in other's eyes because it's so much more fun than working on oneself. Who wants to contemplate their own sins? Attacking others is easier.

Which is the exact reason that Jesus specifically cautioned against Ginny's behavior.

Regarding slavery and the Founding Fathers........I can understand your quandry about this, especially if you were educated in government schools. Let's take a look at the culture our Founding Fathers were raised in. Slavery was a part of the culture they grew up with. THEY did not invent slavery; they INHERITED it, and like I said, it was Christians who abolished the slave trade and worked hard to step out of that cultural practice in the days of the founding of our nation. REMEMBER what I wrote previously. The topic brought about heated debate. A compromise was reached in order to keep the colonies united. Just goes to show that compromise has its price.

An interesting note: More people are enslave today than at any other time in history. http://www.ijm.org/ourwork/injusticetoday My church supports this mission and I am proud of it!Let's all appreciate the freedoms we live in and have thankful hearts to those who have made it possible.

Dear Local MLIS Student,Did you actually READ the article you cited? It gives complete validity to my points!!!!!!!!!David Barton and Wallbuilders explained why OTHERS use those quotes. As for them, their VERY HIGH standard holds. They use ONLY Primary Documentation. PLEASE read the article:http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=126

Gardening Girl: "Slavery was a part of the culture they grew up with. THEY did not invent slavery; they INHERITED it"

This is getting a bit off topic, but because of the presumed rhetorical power of quotations from the "founding fathers," I think it's important to realize that they do not exist as infallible figures which you, of course, realize or you wouldn't have said the preceding.

The thoughts and quotations of the people that formed our nation existed in a period of time different from what we are living in now. The stance on slavery, whether controversial or not, is just one of the outmoded ideas that has been changed as time has gone on. Thankfully, America was founded on the idea of change and adaptation. The Constitution exists as a living document to be interpreted and amended as time goes on.

I mention this in part to justify the comments on slavery and to elucidate the implied analogy that they are attempting to make. Additionally, I think it makes a good example of the importance of critical thinking. Assuming that 200 year old quotations are what this country was founded on, or more importantly is now, seems a bit dangerous. It implies that anyone that questions the logic of the quotations is un-American when open debate should be a primary concern for any citizen.

While you have taken the time to comment on others, you again have failed to reply to my simple requests from Aug 15 for you to clarify the meaning of your commentary on this story. Can you please share more?

This has taken a turn away from this teacher and his deplorable behavior. What happened to don't ask don't tell. This teacher would not be causing such a stir if he would have just kept his personal life personal and not teach homosexuality in a history class to innocent minds. Indoctrination of homosexuality in our youth needs to stop. Homosexuality is wrong, a sin. Those that practice such behavior will be sent into the eternal lake of fire. This teacher is taking our youth with him to the pit of hell by telling them that homosexuality is OK and there is nothing abnormal about it. When there is. This teacher since he is so vocal about his sexual preference needs to be fired. To protect the youth in the schools. Maybe next time he will think twice before he speaks out about his personal life.

Protect the Youth: I cannot believe that you would say something like that. "innocent minds", "indoctrination"? Homosexuality is a personal matter I agree, but since Scott Lone is a homosexual, what is he supposed to do? Just pretend he's someone "normal"? His sexual orientation is not going to somehow stain the minds of students or convince them that they must be homosexual, too. It's not brainwashing, for God's sake! Perhaps you somehow believe that homosexuality is a sin, but you cannot expect everyone else to share the same belief. The God of Christianity would not sentence anyone to hell for being homosexual. The Bible says that Jesus came to save all people, not everyone except homosexuals. The last few commentors are right, it's the people who do the persecuting who'll get such treatment, not the ones being persecuted.

West Bend Citizen Advocate (Ginny right?): Frankly, I find it creepy that you have been looking into Scott Lone so thoroughly. Let the man live his life, he's not bothering you in any way is he? Whether you agree with how he lives or not, he has the right to be homosexual, as you have the right to be heterosexual. Put yourself in the gay community's shoes. Imagine what it would be like if your lifestyle was widely viewed as sinful and dirty. What would that do to you psychologically, especially as a teenager? I agree completely with Maria Hanrahan, Scott Lone is an outstanding person, simply trying to improve the lives and acceptance of West Bend's teenagers. He completely deserved the GSAFE and your trying to destroy his reputation is extremely pathetic.

Hello, this is your local friendly GSA president. Mr. Lone, as Mrs. Maziarka has been so kind to point out, is my advisor.I would just like to say that Mr. Lone is a wonderful person and a great role model and I was elated when I found out he had won the teacher of the year award. The WBHS, however, decided to ignore his recieving of this award, so it seems I should thank Mrs. Maziarka for giving him his credit.Mr. Lone, however does not deserve to have a debate waged over him. He is a great person who works hard to make a living and on the side finds time to help the LGBTQ youth at the high school and their allies fight for their civil rights and also just gives them a safe place to hang out once a week after school. For a long time he was one of the only adults I felt I could turn to. I am extremely grateful to have him in my life.

I think the real issue here, that many who attack Ginny don't seem to realize is that there are two radically different ideologies vying for dominance in our culture. As much as all the liberals want to speak of tolerance and acceptance and "letting everyone go along and get along", the fact is you guys want YOUR value system to be the controlling one in our society. As does Ginny. So lets stop bickering over who should be more tolerant and accepting. We are ALL intolerant of many things. And we all impose our values to a certain degree.

The real issue is whose philosophical/theological belief system should we embrace (we cant have both). Biblical Christianity, when consistently practiced, has produced the greatest of human civil society. Secular humanism and the relativistic, pluralistic, post modern jumble that has sought to replace Christian morality - has produced a nation where broken families, drug abuse, STD's, dysfunction and self-centered materialistic consumerism are the norms.

I want a society built upon the teachings of Jesus - as do many in West Bend - and we are going to fight for that. We owe it to our children. Its not because we hate homosexuals - its actually because we love them and recognize the Creator has instituted something better for all of our own good.

Ginny: Yes I am 15. And Scott Lone is improving the lives of students simply by doing his job. He is providing them with an education and preparing them for college. The fact that he includes history on the gay rights movement is his personal choice and he obviously feels it is an important aspect of our nation's history. And I agree. You're not harassing the school district for allowing the teaching of the civil rights movement of 60 years ago; how is this any different? Mr. Lone also went above and beyond his job description to help homosexual students deal with issues that come up in they're own lives. He also promotes and runs programs and events (such as the Day of Silence) that help more and more students accept homosexuality. The Day of Silence also shows homosexual students that they are not alone and allows heterosexual students to show supports for them. I don't see how this negatively effects anyone. In fact, it promotes a more positive environment in which everyone is treated with respect and dignity.

One does not have to agree with the lifestyle choice of another in order to give respect. You do not agree with my stance on homosexuality. Does that make YOU a hater? A bigot? Someone that others should be protected from? This is my point of view. I do not believe the interjection of homosexual history in the public school setting is actually "teacher choice." Parents do have a say with curriculum. The school district may give input and accept/reject criteria within curriculum, as well. If a teacher is advocating his sexual preference within a classroom setting, it IS indoctrination, and it IS inappropriate.

We have a Human Growth and Development curriculum that has been fine-tuned by teachers and community members. That is the place to discuss sexual issues, not within academics. Slavery is NOT a sexual issue. Just to be clear on the law, the state of Wisconsin mandates that abstinence as the preferred method be taught in all HGD curriculums; therefore, abiding by the moral code of keeping sex out of HG&D, and abstinence as the priority within the public school setting. How does teaching about male/male and female/female sex partners who have left noteworthy marks in history fit in to this setting? Isn't the fact that they, as a PERSON, like any other PERSON, make their marks? Or are we pushing homosexual EVENTS that made history? You see, people are people. Who they choose to have sex with is of no consequence in the teaching of history in a classroom UNLESS it directly advocates homosexual activism.

Go ahead. Begin to cast your stones. It is obvious that what I believe would be censored if many of you had your way. After all, that is what you are saying, isn't it Dan, Marj? You don't want me to speak what I believe? Free speech for SOME, right? That is why you are calling on others to tell me to shut up, right Maria? Transparent, you are.

That is why you are calling on others to tell me to shut up, right Maria? Transparent, you are.

I don't know what you mean, I haven't told anyone to tell you to shut up and why are you speaking like Yoda?

I'd like to comment on a few points in your discussion with Aaron about the history curriculum. You said, "How does teaching about male/male and female/female sex partners who have left noteworthy marks in history fit in to this setting?" I think you're far off the mark if that is what you are suggesting is being taught in the classroom. It's my understanding that the textbooks used in history courses at the high schools in West Bend (and throughout the world) include information about the gay rights movement. That's not Scott Lone's doing or any one individual's doing. It's part of history. It's called progress.

Don't try to call me, or anyone who shares my beliefs for that matter, a bigot, a hater, etc. That only deceives people who are reading this. The fact is you are trying to completely cut off the homosexual community from the rest of the world. Your efforts with sensoring materials at the library are completely offensive. Trying to move certain books with homosexual content is like taking every book in the library containing any hint of the Islamic faith and putting them in a special section of their own. You are trying to embarass outstanding citizens in the community simply because of their sexual orientation and the fact that they choose not to hide it away or pretend that they are what you believe is a "normal" member of society. We on the other hand are not trying to block out your opinion. We are, however trying to make you realize that there are some things you must learn to deal with, and homosexuals are one of those things. What is so wrong with letting this matter rest and not continuing efforts to instill in this city's youth a belief that homosexuals are strange, different, and not worthy of being part of "normal" society?

Let's also be clear that, as Maria pointed out, Scott Lone is not telling students in his class to go out and have sex with people of the same gender. He is in no way promoting or brainwashing or whatever you believe is happening the students into believing that sex within the same gender is the best way to go. What Mr. Lone is trying to do is integrate his knowledge and what he has had experience with and what he thinks is important and noteworthy, into the class. Maria is right, it's the progress of the gay rights movement that he is interested in sharing, not the sex, or the lifestyle that he is somehow trying to force the students to follow. It's no different than if there were a teacher who had been a prominent activist for the civil rights movement, and they chose in they're history and government class to emphasize the highlights of that movement. Would consider that dirty and inappropriate as well?

OK, so my comment before was kind of a plea to stop arguing about Mr. Lone, but seeing as that hasn't happened I would just like to point out something that it seems everyone(on both sides of the issue) is mistaken about:Mr. Lone does NOT have lessons which teach LGBT history. An example of what he does teach would be discussing how other groups besides Jews were killed during the holocaust, such as gypsies, communists, the disabled, and homosexuals. This is also what every other history teacher at the high school will cover during the holocaust unit of US history.Now can we leave the poor man alone?

Faithful Soldier, you apparently do not wish to live in a free society.

You think all people should be forced to live according to your belief system. Fortunately, our founding fathers disagreed with you, and said that people should be free to adopt their own belief systems.

Ginny, speak all you want. Preach all you want. But trying to force a person out of their job because you don't like the way he lives his life is much more than speech. It is harassing an innocent person.

It is not difficult to tell the difference. It's like the difference between me saying 'being overweight is unhealthy', which I have every right to say, and me trying to force the school to fire all the overweight people.

"Faithful Soldier, you apparently do not wish to live in a free society." - Marjorie

If you mean free as in "anyone can do whatever they want" then none of us like nor want a "free" society. Such is absurd hollow rhetoric usually employed to justify ones wrongdoing - sort of like pleading the 5th in a court of law. True freedom has it's limitations. Ask the hundreds of thousands of rapists, murders, and thieves why their "freedom to be who they want to be" was not "respected equally". My earlier comment was simply to ask WHO sets the limitations and moral framework that is ultimately to govern society? Freedom in the American sense meant freedom to do what is right - freedom to follow the dictates of your conscience, freedom of speech and press, and free elections, i.e. representative government And we have a free society in large measure due to the influence of the Bible upon our Founding Fathers. The Bible was the most quoted from source during the the Constitutional Convention. Toleration of opposing viewpoints and religious freedom are consistent with Christian ethics. After all it is not Christians that are pushing "hate crimes" legislation making it a crime to speak against Christianity. We welcome criticism - Gays are the ones pushing to criminalize vocal opposition to their lifestyle via Hates crimes legislation. Christians fought for the rights of blacks to have their freedom - to equate Christian morality with hatred and racism is highly ignorant. Being black is not a choice. Who you have sex with is. You can have whatever "feelings" or "attractions" you want. Fine. But when you step in the realm of behavior do not attempt to pervert right reason by insinuating that you have no choice in the matter. The fact is, if you want to engage in behavior that produces exponentially higher rates of disease and dysfunction - go for it! - but don't tell us we do not have a right to shield our children in the public school and to express our moral disgust.

FSSE: If you have the audacity to equate homosexuals to thieves, rapists and murderers that simply disgusting lifestyles, there is no point in listening to any comments you have considering the tolerance of other human beings and the Christian faith.If you want to have this taught in our high school, I would want to shield MY children from your disgusting behavior as well.

'The Bible was the most quoted from source during the the Constitutional Convention.'

That is untrue. You are mangling a statement by Dan Barton that the Bible was the most cited in circulated publications during the founding period of 1760 to 1805. However, that is highly misleading, as a large number of publications at that time were mass-produced printed sermons. If you look at the writings of only the founders, especially just at writings about the Constitution, virtually none of them cite the Bible.

http://candst.tripod.com/tnppage/arg9.htm

And honestly, anyone with just a little knowledge of history should see the wrongness of this claim. Do you remember seeing a lot of quotations to the Bible in the Federalist Papers?

In fact, the founders cite Enlightenment thinkers far, far more frequently than the Bible. And if you disagree, that tells me that you have read little history and are just parroting a right-wing historian.

So, Faithful Soldier...if it is ok to try to force people out of their jobs and harass them because we think their behavior our immoral, what do you think we can do to shield our children from overweight people? Obesity, according to the Bible, is immoral, and obesity is clearly unhealthy. Should we bar obese people from adopting children? Bar them from teaching children? Not allow obese characters to appear in television shows during the 'family hour'? Generally treat them like crap?

By the way, being overweight is not a revealing issue to the public. If it were something that I felt was going to take me down emotionally, I certainly would not throw myself out in the public realm. Your consistent attack to harass me on this issue is falling on deaf ears. Furthermore, I have hardware in my foot and scars from C-sections, arthritis in my hands and an intestinal disease. There. Now you have a list to choose from. As for weight, I feel inclined to side with the comment of this lady/occasional blog commenter: http://eema-le.blogspot.com/

The point Ginny, is that Christians pick and choose what they believe from the Bible, so why can't you all get on a crusade against overweight people instead of gays? The Bible is far more vocal on it's condemnation of gluttony than homosexuality. (I knew my Catholic education would come in handy some day!)

But I guess it's always easier to point out the "sins" of others, isn't it.

Ginny, I am not trying to harass you. I am trying to get your to step out of your bubble and look at the issue from a different angle. Would it be correct, in your opinion, for someone to act toward a 'glutton' as you behave toward homosexuals? Would that be right or wrong?

From your response, it appears that your answer is 'no'. You remove the comments. You call it harassment. You say it is immature.

You do not like it when people act toward you as you act toward others. You get very indignant, in fact, when people use your behavior as a model and turn it back on you.

Maybe you should focus some time on boning up on the golden rule, Ginny.

Also, I am not sure what arthritis or C-sections have to do with anything. You are trying to equate lifestyle choices with medical ailments over which people have no control. They are not the same. People do not have control over their arthritis, they do have control over their weight.

Here's the issue, though: I do NOT think it is ok to bother people about their weight. Just as it is not ok to harass people over their sexuality. I am trying to help you you understand how your victims feel.

No Pinning. Thanks!

Wisconsin Top Blogs

TWITTER

TIMELINE OF ALA'S HIJACKING OF THE WEST BEND LIBRARY

YOUR LIBRARY: NO LONGER A SAFE PLACE

The West Bend Community Memorial Library and members of the SHARE Library System (to include Germantown, Slinger, Hartford and Kewaskum) no longer can be considered SAFE FOR CHILDREN.

Your library board believes:

1. All materials should be available for all ages (anything goes). Really!2. National control cannot (and should not) be resisted; therefore, the disturbing value system of the ALA, OIF,WLA trumps local control of the library by the citizens and taxpayers it serves.3. Young adults are children ages 11 through 17. (Be sure to address your 11 year old in a manner appropos.)4. Assisting parents in identifying sexually explicit materials within your library is not important to them.5. You must stay with your children and read each book he/she checks out to assure they are not entering into the YA Zone, that is, the "Yes to All Zone."6. ..that if other people's young children (even younger than 11....) are openly reading books of a sexually explicit, graphic nature, say nothing...and by all means, don't stop them from checking them out. You, too, can have an 8-year-old snag "The Joy of Sex" off the shelf right here in your very own library!7. ..that porn filters are not required, therefore, none are needed. True loyalty to the many children they serve. After all, we would not want to restrict freedom of speech to those young'uns!8. ...that organizations such as SafeLibraries,PFOX, PABBIS, and Family Friendly Libraries, that work to protect children from being sexually victimized are not welcome in our community.

9. That the excerpts listed below (WARNING: NOT SUITABLE FOR CHILDREN) are perfectly acceptable for the eyes of children.

This is a propagana battle to ensure children retain access to inappropriate mateial despite the law, common sense and community standards.

PARENTS, TAXPAYERS, CITIZENS OF THE SHARED LIBRARY SYSTEM OF THE WEST BEND COMMUNITY MEMORIAL LIBRARY.......

YOU NO LONGER ARE A TAXPAYING SUPPORTER AND/OR PATRON OF A FAMILY-SAFE LIBRARY.